Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Complex Colorectal Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for complex colorectal lesions have shown variable results. We conducted a meta-analysis of the available data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies comparing EFTR versus ESD for complex colorectal lesions. The outcomes of interest were resection rates, procedure time (min), and complications. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) along with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 4 studies with 530 patients (n=215 EFTR, n=315 ESD) were included. The mean follow-up duration was 5 months. The mean age of the patients was 68 years and 64% were men. The EFTR and ESD groups had similar rates of en bloc resection (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 0.60-4.97, P=0.31) and R0 resection (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 0.55-4.14, P=0.42). The EFTR group had significantly reduced procedure time (SMD -1.87, 95% CI: -3.13 to -0.61, P=0.004), total complications (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.13-0.44, P<0.00001), perforation (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.39, P=0.0005) and postresection electrocoagulation syndrome (OR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.01-0.48, P=0.008). Delayed bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.30-2.12, P=0.66). Residual/recurrent lesions were significantly higher in the EFTR group (OR: 4.67, 95% CI: 1.39-15.66, P=0.01). DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis of small studies with high heterogeneity showed that EFTR and ESD have comparable resection rates for complex colorectal lesions. EFTR is faster and has fewer complications, but it increases residual or recurrent lesions.

Safety and efficacy of thalidomide in treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to angioectasias: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thalidomide has been used for angioectasia-associated refractory gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), with studies showing variable efficacy and side effects profile. We conducted a meta-analysis to reconcile the data. METHODS: Online databases were searched for studies evaluating thalidomide in patients with refractory/recurrent GIB due to angioectasias. The outcomes of interest were cessation of bleeding, rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, hospitalization and adverse events. Pooled proportions for incidence, and odds ratios (OR) for comparison with control were calculated along with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of seven studies with 346 patients (n = 269 thalidomide, n = 77 control) were included. Thalidomide dose was usually started at 50-100mg/day. The mean age was 65 years, 45% patients were men, and mean follow-up was 1.8 years. The pooled clinical outcomes with thalidomide were: cessation of bleeding 42.2% (95% CI 36.02 to 48.41), rebleeding 30%, need for blood transfusion 20.1%, hospitalization 40% and adverse events 55.9%. When compared with the control group in 2 studies, patients on thalidomide had significantly higher odds of cessation of bleeding (OR 21.40, 95% CI 5.78 to 79.29, p < 0.00001) and adverse events, with lower need for blood transfusion and hospitalization. DISCUSSION: In patients with angioectasias-related refractory/recurrent GIB, the use of thalidomide results in significantly decreased bleeding risk and may play a role in the management of such patients.

Predicting the risk of early intensive care unit admission for patients hospitalized with acute pancreatitis using supervised machine learning.

Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a complex and life-threatening disease. Early recognition of factors predicting morbidity and mortality is crucial. We aimed to develop and validate a pragmatic model to predict the individualized risk of early intensive care unit (ICU) admission for patients with AP. Methods: The 2019 Nationwide Readmission Database was used to identify patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of AP without ICU admission. A matched comparison cohort of AP patients with ICU admission within 7 days of hospitalization was identified from the National Inpatient Sample after 1:N propensity score matching. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression was used to select predictors and develop an ICU acute pancreatitis risk (IAPR) score validated by 10-fold cross-validation. Results: A total of 1513 patients hospitalized for AP were included. The median age was 50.0 years (interquartile range: 39.0-63.0). The three predictors that were selected included hypoxia (area under the curve [AUC] 0.78), acute kidney injury (AUC 0.72), and cardiac arrhythmia (AUC 0.61). These variables were used to develop a nomogram that displayed excellent discrimination (AUC 0.874) (bootstrap bias-corrected 95% confidence interval 0.824-0.876). There was no evidence of miscalibration (test statistic = 2.88; P = 0.09). For high-risk patients (total score >6 points), the sensitivity was 68.94% and the specificity was 92.66%. Conclusions: This supervised machine learning-based model can help recognize high-risk AP hospitalizations. Clinicians may use the IAPR score to identify patients with AP at high risk of ICU admission within the first week of hospitalization.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Therapy in Symptomatic Pancreatic Divisum: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreas divisum (PD) is a congenital malformation of the pancreas and is implicated as a cause of pancreatitis. The role of endotherapy has been variable in symptomatic PD indicated by recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), or chronic pancreatic-type abdominal pain (PP). The aim of this study was to analyze the pooled data to determine the success of endoscopic intervention for pancreas divisum. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (inception to July 2023) to identify studies reporting on the use of endoscopic therapy in symptomatic pancreatic divisum. The random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled rates and I2% values were used to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies were retrieved that reported endoscopic intervention in pancreatic divisum. The calculated pooled rate of technical success was 92% (95% CI: 87-95; I2=63%). The calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 65% (95% CI: 60-70; I2=60%). The rate of clinical success by PD subtypes was highest in RAP at 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). Available studies had significant heterogeneity in defining clinical success. The rate of adverse events was 71% (95% CI: 65-76; I2=24%). CONCLUSIONS: The role of endoscopic therapy in pancreatic divisum is variable with the highest success rate in recurrent acute pancreatitis. Endoscopic intervention is associated with a higher-than-usual rate of adverse events, including post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background/Aims: In this meta-analysis, we studied the safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal dysplasia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: Multiple databases were searched, and studies were retrieved based on pre-specified criteria until October 2022. The outcomes assessed were resection rates, procedural complications, local recurrence, metachronous tumors, and the need for surgery after ESD in IBD. Standard meta-analysis methods were followed using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity. Results: Twelve studies comprising 291 dysplastic lesions in 274 patients were included with a median follow-up of 25 months. The pooled en-bloc resection, R0 resection, and curative resection rates were 92.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9%-95.4%; I2=0%), 81.5% (95% CI, 72.5%-88%; I2=43%), and 48.9% (95% CI, 32.1%-65.9%; I2=87%), respectively. The local recurrence rate was 3.9% (95% CI, 2%-7.5%; I2=0%). The pooled rates of bleeding and perforation were 7.7% (95% CI, 4.5%-13%; I2=10%) and 5.3% (95% CI, 3.1%-8.9%; I2=0%), respectively. The rates of metachronous recurrence and additional surgery following ESD were 10% (95% CI, 5.2%-18.2%; I2=55%) and 13% (95% CI, 8.5%-19.3%; I2=54%), respectively. Conclusions: ESD is safe and effective for the resection of dysplastic lesions in IBD with an excellent pooled rate of en-bloc and R0 resection.

Prevalence Of Endoscopy Related Injuries and Its Impact on Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopy related musculoskeletal injuries (ERI) are commonly reported but its exact prevalence and clinical impact remains obscure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the present literature to answer these questions. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus databases were searched for studies evaluating ERI in gastroenterologists, and surgeons. The co-primary outcome was to assess prevalence of endoscopy related injuries ie. Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), De Quervain's tenosynovitis (DQTS) and hand numbness. The other co-primary outcome was to assess prevalence of endoscopy related pain syndromes in the present literature. RESULTS: Twelve studies including 4563 respondents were included. Majority of the participants were males (3321, 72.7%) and most were right-handed (86.2%). The career prevalence of CTS as pooled from ten studies was 5.3% (95% CI: 1.5%, 8.9%, I2=97.1%), while prevalence of DQTS as reported by five studies was 8.5% (95% CI 0.1%, 17.0%). The pooled prevalence of thumb pain, neck pain and back pain was 25.4%, 23.1% and 19.7% respectively but the prevalence varied according to the type of questionnaires used. Only 341 of 864 (39.4%) respondents had received prior training in ergonomics while 623 of 889 (69.0%) respondents expressed a desire for further training in ergonomics. Overall, there is a moderate risk of bias in the present literature. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy related injuries of CTS, DQTS and endoscopy related pain are very common. These injuries can be severe, requiring surgery, and lead to loss of productivity. Most gastroenterologist report an unmet need for training in proper ergonomics of endoscopy.

Cold Snare Polypectomy in Small (<10 mm) Pedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic removal techniques for colorectal polyps include cold snare polypectomy (CSP) and hot snare polypectomy (HSP). Although HSP is recommended for pedunculated polyps (PPs) larger than 10 mm, data regarding use of CSP for PPs <10 mm continues to emerge. We aimed to investigate outcomes of these techniques in small (<10 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyps. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched till June 2022 to identify studies involving the removal of small PPs with CSP and HSP. Random effects model was used to calculate outcomes and 95% CI. Primary outcome was the pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed bleeding with CSP and HSP as well as prophylactic and post resection clip placement. RESULTS: Six studies including 1025 patients (1111 polyps with a mean size 4 to 8.5 mm) were analyzed. 116 and 995 polyps were removed with HSP and CSP, respectively. The overall pooled rate of successful en-bloc resection with CSP was 99.7% (CI 99.1-99.9; I2 0%). Pooled immediate and delayed bleeding after CSP was 49.8% (CI 46.8-52.91; I2 98%) and 0% (CI 0.00-0.00; I2 0%), respectively. Delayed bleeding was higher with HSP, relative risk 0.05 (CI 0.01-0.43; I2 0%), P =0.006, whereas immediate bleeding was higher with CSP, relative risk 7.89 (CI 4.36-14.29; I2 0%), P <0.00001. Pooled rates of prophylactic clip placement and post-procedure clip placement (to control immediate bleeding) were 55.3% and 47.2%, respectively. Finally, right colon polyp location significantly correlated with frequency of immediate bleeding. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that CSP is safe and effective for resection of small PPs.

Conventional Versus Traction Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Tumors: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (C-ESD) for colorectal lesions, the traction method (T-ESD) allows the lesion to be stabilized with easier dissection. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported conflicting results on the clinical outcomes of T-ESD as compared with C-ESD. We conducted a meta-analysis to compile the data. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched for RCTs evaluating C-ESD versus T-ESD for colorectal tumors. The end points of interest were procedure time (min), resection speed (mm²/min), R0 resection, en bloc resection, delayed bleeding, and perforation. Standard meta-analysis methods were employed using the random-effects model. RESULTS: Six RCTs with a total of 566 patients (C-ESD n=284, T-ESD n=282) were included. The mean age was 67±10 y and 60% were men. As compared with the T-ESD technique, the C-ESD group was associated with longer procedure time (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.23, P<0.00001) and lesser resection speed (SMD -1.03, 95% CI -2.01 to -0.06, P=0.04). No significant difference was found in the 2 groups with respect to R0 resection rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06, P=0.87), en bloc resection (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, P=0.35), delayed bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.59, P=0.55) and perforation (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 6.27, P=0.16). DISCUSSION: On meta-analysis, pooled procedure time was significantly faster with T-ESD compared with C-ESD. The clinical outcomes, however, were comparable.

Diagnostic accuracy of bowel ultrasonography in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Bowel ultrasonography (BUS) is emerging as a promising noninvasive tool for assessing disease activity in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of BUS in IBD patients against the gold standard diagnostic method, standard colonoscopy. Methods: Major databases were searched from inception to May 2023 for studies on BUS diagnostic accuracy in IBD. Outcomes of interest were pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV), and negative (NPV) predictive values. Endoscopic confirmation served as ground truth. Standard meta-analysis methods with a random-effects model and I2 statistics were applied. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Results: Twenty studies (1094 patients) were included in the final analysis. The majority (75%) of studies considered bowel wall thickness >3 mm as abnormal. Endoscopic evaluation was performed between days 3 and 180. The pooled diagnostic accuracy of BUS in IBD was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI] 58-72%; I2=78%), sensitivity was 88.6% (95%CI 85-91%; I2=77%), and specificity 86% (95%CI 81-90%; I2=95%). PPV and NPV were 94% (95%CI 93-96%; I2=25%) and 74% (95%CI 66-80%; I2=95%), respectively. On subgroup analysis, small-intestine contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (SICUS) demonstrated high sensitivity (97%, 95%CI 91-99%; I2=83%), whereas BUS exhibited high specificity (94%, 95%CI 92-96%; I2=0%) and NPV (76%, 95%CI 68-83%; I2=80.9%). Meta-regression revealed a significant relation between side-to-side anastomosis and BUS specificity (P=0.02) and NPV (P=0.004). Conclusion: The high diagnostic accuracy of BUS in detecting bowel wall inflammation suggests utilizing regular BUS as the primary modality, with subsequent consideration of SICUS if clinically warranted.

Renal replacement therapy prior to liver transplant and inpatient mortality in patients without advanced kidney disease: A nationwide study.

Background and Aim: The utility of renal replacement therapy (RRT) before liver transplant (LT) in patients without end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD-IV/V) is debatable and lacks data support. We aimed to evaluate the impact of RRT on patients undergoing LT. Methods: We used the National Readmission Database (2016-2019) to identify all index hospitalizations undergoing RRT before LT (cases). A matched comparison cohort of similar hospitalizations without RRT before LT was identified (controls) after 1:1 propensity score matching for age, gender, and available comorbidities. Results: We matched 364 cases (RRT before LT) to 364 controls (LT without prior RRT). There was no statistical difference in all-cause inpatient mortality (4.9% vs 3.6% P = 0.4). A significantly greater proportion of cases were associated with ICU admission (40.7% vs 17.0%, P < 0.001) and RRT requirement post LT (100% vs 17%, P < 0.001). There was no difference in 30- (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1, 0.4-2.6), 60- (HR 0.9, 0.4-1.8), or 90-day (HR 0.8, 0.4-1.6) inpatient mortality between the groups. Also, 180-day survival estimates were comparable (P = 0.5). The results were similar in patients with no chronic kidney disease (CKD) and CKD-III. Conclusion: RRT prior to LT, in patients without advanced CKD or ESRD, was associated with greater instances of ICU stay and need for future RRT. Also, 30-, 60-, and 90-day inpatient mortality rates were similar, and 180-day survival estimates were comparable.

Device-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection in colorectum: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is emerging as an effective modality for mucosal and submucosal lesions in the colorectum. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to analyze the success and safety of device-assisted EFTR in the colon and rectum. METHODS: A literature search was performed in the Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases for studies evaluating device-assisted EFTR between inception to October 2022. The primary outcome of the study was clinical success (R0 resection) with EFTR. Secondary outcomes included technical success, procedure duration, and adverse events. RESULTS: In all, 29 studies with 3467 patients (59% male patients, 3492 lesions) were included in the analysis. The lesions were located in right colon (47.5%), left colon (28.6%), and rectum (24.3%). EFTR was performed for subepithelial lesions in 7.2% patients. The pooled mean size of the lesions was 16.6 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.9-18.2, I2 98%). Technical success was achieved in 87.1% (95% CI 85.1-88.9%, I2 39%) procedures. The pooled rate of en bloc resection was 88.1% (95% CI 86-90%, I2 47%) and R0 resection was 81.8% (95% CI 79-84.3%, I2 56%). In subepithelial lesions, the pooled rate of R0 resection was 94.3% (95% CI 89.7-96.9%, I2 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events was 11.9% (95% CI 10.2-13.9%, I2 43%) and major adverse events requiring surgery was 2.5% (95% CI 2.0-3.1%, I2 0%). CONCLUSION: Device-assisted EFTR is a safe and effective treatment modality in cases with adenomatous and subepithelial colorectal lesions. Comparative studies are required with conventional resection techniques, including endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.

Device malfunctions with use of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy devices: Analysis of the MAUDE database.

Background: The safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition through fine-needle biopsy devices is well-established in clinical trials. The real-world experience of using these devices is not known. The authors analyzed the postmarketing surveillance data from the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database to answer this question. Methods: The Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database from January 2012 to June 2022 was accessed to evaluate for device malfunctions and patient-related adverse consequences of these malfunctions. Results: There were 344 device-related issues. Most issues were due to detachment or breakage of the device (n = 185 [53.7%]). Seventy-six of the breakages (40.8%) occurred during the procedure, whereas 89 cases (47.8%) occurred while removing the needle from the endoscope. The most common site of tissue biopsy at the time of needle breakage was the pancreas (44 [23.8%]).The common patient-related adverse events were retained foreign body (n = 50 [14.5%]) followed by bleeding (16, 4.6%). Six patients (3.4%) required a second intervention for removal of the retained foreign bodies including surgery in 2 cases. The device breakage damaged the endoscope in 3 cases (1.7%), and there was 1 case of needlestick injury to the nurse. Conclusion: The fine-needle biopsy devices can be associated with needle breakage and bending; these adverse events were not previously reported. Needle breakages can result in a retained foreign body that may require additional procedures including surgery. These real-world findings from the MAUDE database may inform clinical decisions and help improve clinical outcomes.

Cold Versus Hot Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Sessile Serrated Colorectal Polyps ≥10 mm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis studying the efficacy and safety of cold versus hot endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for resection of sessile serrated polyps (SSPs) ≥10 mm. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched until January 2023 for studies reporting outcomes of cold versus hot EMR for SSPs ≥10 mm. The primary outcome was the residual SSP rate. Secondary outcomes included technical success rate, R0 resection rate, and adverse events. We used standard meta-analysis methods using the random-effects model, and I2% was used to assess heterogeneity. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the final analysis. In all, 1896 SSPs were included with a mean polyp size of 23.7 mm (range, 15.9 to 33). A total of 1452 SSPs were followed up for a median follow-up duration of 15.3 months (range, 6 to 37). The pooled residual SSP rate for cold EMR was 4.5% (95% CI: 1.0-17.4), and 5.1% (95% CI: 2.4-10.4) for hot EMR (P=0.9). The pooled rates of technical success, R0 resection, immediate bleeding, and perforation were comparable. Hot EMR was significantly associated with lower piecemeal resection (59.2% vs. 99.3%, P<0.001), higher en-bloc resection (41.4% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001), and delayed bleeding rate (4% vs. 0.7%, P=0.05) compared to cold EMR. CONCLUSIONS: Cold EMR has similar efficacy compared to hot EMR for resection of SSP ≥ 10 mm, despite limitations in piecemeal R0 resection rate reporting. Although hot EMR was associated with a higher rate of en-bloc resection, it also showed an increased risk of delayed bleeding compared to cold EMR.

Prevalence of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma With and Without Gastroesophageal Reflux: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms are an essential criterion for Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening in most gastroenterology society guidelines, a significant proportion of BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) cases do not endorse them. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the prevalence of BE/EAC in those with and without GERD. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted through 5 major databases for studies reporting prevalence of BE/EAC in patients with and without GERD. Pooled proportions and odds ratios (ORs) of BE, long-segment BE, short-segment BE, dysplasia, and EAC in patients with and without GERD were synthesized. RESULTS: Forty-three articles (12,883 patients with GERD; 51,350 patients without GERD) were included in the final analysis. BE prevalence was 7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8%-8.5%) and 2.2% (95% CI, 1.6%-3%) among individuals with and without GERD, respectively. EAC prevalence was 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-1%) and 0.1% (95% CI, 0%-0.2%) in those with and without GERD, respectively. The overall risks for BE (OR, 2.91; 95% CI, 2.06-4.11) and long-segment BE (OR,4.17; 95% CI, 1.78-9.77) were higher in patients with GERD, but the risk for short-segment BE (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.89-3.52) did not differ between the two groups. In 9 population-based high-quality studies (2244 patients with GERD; 3724 patients without GERD), BE prevalence in patients without GERD was 4.9% (95% CI, 2.6%-9%). BE prevalence was highest in North American studies (10.6% [GERD] and 4.8% [non-GERD]). CONCLUSIONS: BE prevalence in those without GERD is substantial, particularly in large high-quality population-based studies. These data are important to factor in future BE/EAC early detection guidelines.

EUS-guided therapies for primary and secondary prophylaxis in gastric varices-An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and Objectives: Gastric varices (GVs) are associated with a higher risk of uncontrolled bleeding and death when compared with esophageal varices. While endoscopic glue injection therapy has been traditionally used for secondary prophylaxis in GV, data regarding primary prophylaxis continue to emerge. Recently, EUS-guided therapies have been used in GV bleeding. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of several major databases from inception to June 2022. Our primary goals were to estimate the pooled rates of treatment efficacy, GV obliteration, GV recurrence, and rebleeding with EUS-guided therapy in primary and secondary prophylaxis. Overall adverse events and technical failures were assessed. Random-effects model was used for our meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 % statistics. Results: Eighteen studies with 604 patients were included. In primary prophylaxis, pooled rate of GV obliteration was 90.2% (confidence interval [CI], 81.1-95.2; I2 = 0). With combination EUS-glue and coil therapy, the rate was 95.4% (CI, 86.7%-98.5%; I2 = 0). Pooled rate of posttherapy GV bleeding was 4.9% (CI, 1.8%-12.4%; I2 = 0). In secondary prophylaxis, pooled rate of treatment efficacy was 91.9% (CI, 86.8%-95.2%; I2 = 12). With EUS-glue, EUS-coil, and combination EUS-glue and coil, the rates were 94.3% (CI, 88.9%-97.1%; I2 = 0), 95.5% (CI, 80.3%-99.1%; I2 = 0), and 88.7% (CI, 76%-95.1%; I2 = 14), respectively. Pooled rate of GV obliteration was 83.6% (CI, 71.5%-91.2%; I2 = 74). With EUS-glue, EUS-coil, and combination EUS-glue and coil, the rates were 84.6% (CI, 75.9%-90.6%; I2 = 31), 92.3% (CI, 81.1%-97.1%; I2 = 0), and 84.5% (CI, 50.8%-96.7%; I2 = 75), respectively. Pooled rates of GV rebleeding and recurrence were 18.1% (CI, 13.1%-24.3%; I2 = 16) and 20.6% (CI, 9.3%-39.5%; I2 = 66), respectively. Conclusion: Our analysis shows that EUS-guided therapy for GVs is technically feasible and clinically successful in both primary and secondary prophylaxis of GV.

Risk of Complications After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Pregnancy: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested higher complication rates after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in pregnancy. AIMS: We performed a propensity-matched cohort analysis to assess the risk of ERCP-related complications among pregnant women in the United States. METHODS: The TriNetX database was analyzed to identify pregnant and non-pregnant females between 18 and 50 years of age who underwent ERCP. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for age and race. Outcomes included risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, perforation within 7 days, and infections within 30 days of ERCP. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess the risk of PEP based on indication for ERCP. RESULTS: The risk of PEP was higher in the pregnant cohort compared to controls, 10.3% vs 6.08%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20-2.61; p = 0.003. We found no difference in the risk of GI bleeding, perforation, and infections between the two cohorts. There was no difference in the risk of PEP in the pregnant cohort compared to controls who underwent ERCP for acute choledocholithiasis (4.2% vs 2.1%, aOR 1.98, 95% CI 0.97-4.03, p = 0.5) or ascending cholangitis (18.6% vs 14.7%, aOR 1.32, 95% CI 0.52-3.39, p = 0.55). There was no difference in the risk of PEP in the pregnant cohort after sensitivity analysis based on age, race, obesity, and indomethacin use. CONCLUSION: Pregnant females are at an increased risk of PEP but not GI bleeding, perforation, and infections when compared to non-pregnant controls. Clinicians should be cautious when proceeding with ERCP during pregnancy.